J Bioethic Inq
-
The application of continuous deep sedation (CDS) in the treatment of intractable suffering at the end of life continues to be tied to a number of concerns that have negated its use in palliative care. Part of the resistance towards use of this treatment option of last resort has been the continued association of CDS with physician-associated suicide and/or euthanasia (PAS/E), which is compounded by a lack clinical guidelines and a failure to cite this treatment under the aegis of a palliative care approach. I argue that reinstituting a palliative care-inspired approach that includes a holistic review of the patient's situation and the engagement of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) guided by clearly defined practice requirements that have been lacking amongst many prevailing guidelines will overcome prevailing objections to this practice and allow for the legitimization of this process.
-
Promotion of prescription drugs may appear to be severely limited in some jurisdictions due to restrictions on direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA). However, in most jurisdictions, strategies exist to raise consumer awareness about prescription drugs, notably through the deployment of direct-to-consumer information (DTCI) campaigns that encourage patients to seek help for particular medical conditions. In Canada, DTCI is presented by industry and regulated by Health Canada as being purely informational activities, but their design and integration in broader promotional campaigns raise very similar ethical concerns as those associated with DTCA. ⋯ Yet, with DTCI the industry is playing within the existing rules and regulations set by health regulators. To respond appropriately to this regulatory incoherence, we argue that DTCI should be regulated as a type of direct-to-consumer indirect advertising. Even if the case and specific regulations presented here are Canadian, the implications extend to every country that has a partial or total prohibition on DTCA.
-
The conception of the doctor-patient relationship under Australian law has followed British common law tradition whereby the relationship is founded in a contractual exchange. By contrast, this article presents a rationale and framework for an alternative model-a "Trust Model"-for implementation into law to more accurately reflect the contemporary therapeutic dynamic. The framework has four elements: (i) an assumption that professional conflicts (actual or perceived) with patient safety, motivated by financial or personal interests, should be avoided; (ii) an onus on doctors to disclose these conflicts; (iii) a proposed mechanism to contend with instances where doctors choose not to disclose; and (iv) sanctions for non-compliance with the regime.